I found it odd to browse the "Crime and Mystery" section of the forum, and to find no thread on surely one of the most intriguing crime/mysteries of the 21st Century so far - the Madeleine McCann case.
Now, I am no 'conspiracy theorist'. Stories in the news are generally what they appear to be, unless there is some compelling evidence to the contrary.
I do not believe (for example) that explosive charges were placed inside the Trade Centre towers, or that it was an "inside job" by the USA government. No, 9/11 was exactly what it appeared to be, and no more: a diabolical terrorist plot by radical Islamists.
Yet this case seems, to me, to consist of something more than our media made it out to be. Here, there is some form of a "conspiracy theory" which I can accept. I don't know, nor can I fathom out what the conspiracy is all about, nor what sort of deception lies at the heart of it, but of this I am certain; that there is far more to this case than meets the eye. Something is just "not right" about this story, that is all I feel sure of. Some aspect is being covered up, there is something that the "powers that be" are desperately frightened about us discovering.
The McCanns' whole focus in the media seems to be geared towards asking us "What happened to Madeleine". Yet, I feel that this is a case that can only be solved by us looking at the background (eg, who are the Tapas Group, what draws them together) and slowly working our way in from the outside, rather than by focussing in on the events of 3/5/07 and working outwards from that.
My own hypothesis? - I have no idea how M.McC died, but I believe she died in the apartment, on or before 3/5/07, and her body was most likely frozen in a catering freezer, until late May, when the body was moved in the hired Renault (while the McCanns were having their Papal audience) and disposed of.
I find it very, very sinister that Clarence Mitchell (until then, the head of the Labour gov't's media monitoring unit) suddenly gave up his job in order to act as the McCann's spokesman just because he "felt sorry for them" (as you do, yerr, rrrright!) If you are innocent, you do not need a government-trained spokesman to speak for you. Something very, VERY dodgy is being covered up, there.